About your Search

20130207
20130207
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
. the confirmation vote fort next defense secretary was held up until the current pentagon chief agreed to answer questions about last september's terrorist attack in libya. today a senate panel got to question leon panetta, national security correspondent jennifer griffin tells us not everyone was satisfied with what they heard. >> based on time, distance and alertouldn't have gotten there on time. >> time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, it takes hours to be able to respond. >> defense secretary leon panetta and joint chiefs chairman general martin dempsey explained why the military couldn't do more to save the lives of ambassador chris stevens, sean smith, tyrone woods and glenn dougherty in benghazi on september 11. >> united states military, as i've said, is not and frankly should not be a 911 service capable of arriving on the scene within minutes to every possible contingency around the world. >> republican senators weren't satisfied. >> did you know how long the attack was going to last, secretary panetta? >> no idea. >> well, it could have lasted for two days. any airplane lau
on capitol hill right now on the a hearing for the benghazi terror attack where he addressed the pentagon's response to the assault on our consulate on september 11th. four americans, including our ambassador to libya, died in that attack. this comes just a day after mr. panetta emotionally charged parting speech to students at georgetown university where he blasted the massive defense cuts known as the sequester, set to go into effect just weeks from now. >> if sequester happens, let me tell you some of the results. we will furlough as many as 800,000 dod civilians around the country for up to 22 days. they could face a 20% cut in their salary. you don't think that will impact on our economy? you don't think that's going to impact on jobs? you don't think that's going to impact on our ability to recover from the recession? jon: mr. panetta also deliver ad stark warning about the scale and scope of cyber attacks on this country saying they could cripple the united states. >> we are literally the target of thousands of cyber attacks every day. every day. thousands of sigher about attacks t
of the events of the events in benghazi. there were a series of meetings in the pentagon for expanding the department of defense's response as well as to prepare for the potential outbreak of further violence throughout the region. during these meetings, secretary panetta authorized a number of deployments. i hope that secretary panetta and the chairman will provide the committee with detail on the circumstances that led them to these decisions. since september, there's been a great deal of focus on the supporting role that the marine corps guards played -- play in many u.s. diplomatic missions abroad. the marine corps did not have an lament in again-- in benghazi. the committee will be closely monitoring the use of these marines. our fiscal year 2013 national defense authorization act that requires the secretary of defense to conduct an assessment of the mission of the marine security guard program, whether it should be expanded and to report to congress on the results of this review. more immediately, the provision requires the secretary to develop a plan to increase the number of ma
from georgetown, serve as my chief of staff at the c.i.a. and then followed me to the pentagon as my chief of staff. and also someone who's had a public affairs at the pentagon, george little, who is also someone who both graduated and later taught here at georgetown. talented young individuals who have been at my side every day for the last four years at both the c.i.a. and the pentagon, and i am deeply grateful for their work for me and on behalf of the nation and i am deeply grateful for georgetown for training such extraordinary public servants. and speaking of extraordinary public servants, i think many in this audience know that there's a georgetown professor that the president has nominated to serve as the next secretary of defense, chuck hagel, and i am confident and i've expressed that confidence publicly that the men and women of the department of defense will have the kind of advocate they need as the nation emerges from more than a decade of war. lastly, i'm honored to be here, as i said, as a catholic and as a proud graduate of another jesuit institution, santa clara uni
to most americans has really grown exponentially. ten years ago the pentagon had 50 drones. today it's 7,500. a third of the air force's fleet unmanned. u.s. military carried out 447 drone attacks in afghanistan in the first 11 months in 2012. 294 total in all of 2011. what's behind this drone explosion, if you will? >> well, i think that drones are sort of irresistible for a policymaker, for a president who is worried about protecting the country but also, you know, a president who in many ways was formed politically by the experiences in iraq and afghanistan, at least as far as his foreign policy views, who doesn't want to see dangerous, costly, bloody military entanglements in far away nations. drones are surgical. they're cheap. you can have a pretty high degree of accuracy. it is true that there have been numerous civilian casualties, but relative to any other technology we have short of sending in, you know, an assassin with a sniper rifle which in many cases just isn't practical, drones are the best way to sort of take the enemy off the battlefield. they don't cost a lot of money.
of improving efficiency within the pentagon. i would say that applies to all the other agencies as well. secondly, most of the concern about sequestration is focused on readiness and training, which is absolutely true. if you talk to the lawyers that work with the defense contractors, they think they will have a field day care and some had testimony last year that the legal hassles emanating from sequestration may eat up a lot of their savings. but beyond that, there are a lot of dangerous places in the world. and what we do is try to develop capability to deal with the unknowable contingencies of what could happen at a place like syria or iran or north korea. with less money, you can prepare for future contingencies. the point is that it does not just readiness. it hurts us in the real world today. there are lots of options to deal with this. as was mentioned, the house passed bills twice last year to substitute sequestration's savings for other more targeted savings so that you save this amount of money, you're still fiscally responsible, but you don't get defense and these domestic p
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)